A93091:156
A treatise of liturgies, power of the keys, and of matter of the visible…A treatise of liturgies, power of the keyes, and of matter of the visible…
A treatise of liturgies, power of the keys, and of matter of the visible church. In answer to the reverend servant of Christ, Mr. John Ball. By Thomas Shepherd, sometimes fellow of Emanuel-College in Cambridge, and late pastor of Cambridge in New-England.A treatise of liturgies, power of the keyes, and of matter of the visible church. In answer to the reverend servant of Christ, Mr. John Ball. By Thomas Shephard, sometimes fellow of Emanuel-Colledge in Cambridge, and late pastour of Cambridge in New-England.
London: printed by E. Cotes for Andrew Crooke, 1652
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Answ. First, we must still mind the Reader of the true and full state of the question, which in our answer is of joining in prayer, with, and when that whole Liturgy is used, and he that joins with that whole Liturgy must needs be supposed to have actual communion with all the corruptions thereof what ever they be, and therefore though this Proposition reach to the practise of able and godly Ministers, yet let none think we plead herein separation from their ministry, but only that people may not conform with them to any corruption in worship, and by this proposition also the Author might easily have seen that we denied the other (which was woven in with this) not because of the ungodliness of the Minister alone as he carried his dispute, but chiefly in respect of the corruptions of the worship, together with the unlawfulness of such a ministry that is both unable and ungodly.
Answ. First, wee must still mind the Reader of the true and full state of the question, which in our answer is of joyning in prayer, with, and when that whole Liturgy is used, and hee that joynes with that whole Liturgie must needs bee supposed to have actuall communion with all the corruptions thereof what ever they bee, and therefore though this Proposition reach to the practise of able and godly Ministers, yet let none thinke wee plead herein separation from their ministery, but onely that people may not conforme with them to any corruption in worship, and by this proposition also the Author might easily have seene that wee denied the other (which was woven in with this) not because of the ungodlinesse of the Minister alone as hee carried his dispute, but chiefly in respect of the corruptions of the worship, together with the unlawfulnesse of such a ministery that is both unable and ungodly.
Secondly, concerning the argument it runs as full for conformity to all the corrupt ceremonies of the book as the corrupt worship it self therein, as was said before, clear the one, viz. nonconformity to ceremonies, show a reason why you will separate from the Sacrament, because you will not kneel according to the book, and you answer your argument here alleged against us: but the reply proceeds.